-
Re: SOPA's intentions
Here's a vid on how the bill could actually be used
http://vimeo.com/31100268
from this website http://americancensorship.org/
And if anyone is interested in tryig to stop it at the moment wikipedia is considering a blackout to raise awareness http://www.wikipediablackout.com/
Tbh i'm more concerned about how it will affect the net as a whole whether camsites go unscathed or not...
-
-
Re: SOPA's intentions
^^^ actually, from a much more pragmatic standpoint, I'm more concerned that SOPA will provide the US gov't new legal authority to prevent Visa / Mastercard / other web charge processors from allowing US webcam customers to transfer their money to foreign webcam host sites like StreaMates. If / when that happens, 2/3rds of all of the webcam money being spent in the world will no longer be accessible unless you are a camgirl with an American IP working through a US based webcam host !!!
-
Re: SOPA's intentions
-
-
Re: SOPA's intentions
^^^ this was indirectly addressed in the post I made in the 'Internet Censorship' thread. Indeed, some of the previous backers of SOPA are now having second thoughts in regard to outright blocking of domain names / IP's. So when the SOPA bill comes up for a vote again on January 24th, the domain name / IP blocking provisions will probably be dropped. However, the mandates to online credit card payment processors to NOT allow transactions between US customers and foreign websites will still be in the bill. So if passed with this change, in terms of camgirls, this will mean that US adult webcam viewers will still be able to access the FREE content on foreign webcam host sites like StreaMates. They just won't be able to complete transactions in order to view PAID content !
This change defuses the hue and cry about 'internet censorship' that domain name / IP blocking would have represented ... while at the same time fulfilling the arguable REAL purpose of SOPA i.e. protecting US businesses and US jobs from 'foreign' competition.
-
Re: SOPA's intentions
since the other thread has slid into the back pages, here's the latest re SOPA ...
from
(snip)"In a statement, Smith said he concluded that the SOPA legislation's backers should remove the domain name access provision "so that the Committee can further examine the issues surrounding this provision."
"We will continue to look for ways to ensure that foreign websites cannot sell and distribute illegal content to U.S. consumers," Smith said.
Smith noted that the legislation still contains provisions to "follow the money" -- cutting off the funding of foreign sites from ad networks and payment processors. A provision that allows private partiers to bring claims against foreign sites by obtaining a court order to require that ad networks and payment processors stop the money flow remains. The legislation still contains provisions that would require search engines to disable links to such "rogue" sites.
The House Judiciary Committee adjourned in December before the completion of a markup hearing on the bill. It was apparent then that the legislation had enough votes to pass out of the committee, but opponents have mounted a fierce effort against the legislation since then, with some vowing to campaign against the bill's supporters in their re-election races and pressuring web-hosting service GoDaddy to shift its stance from supporter to opponent.
Rep. Darrell Issa (R-Calif.), one of the chief opponents of the legislation, has proposed an alternative bill that would attempt to combat piracy via the International Trade Commission. He also has scheduled a Jan. 18 hearing before the House Oversight Committee, which he chairs, to examine the impact of domain name and search blocking on cybersecurity.
On Thursday, the chief sponsor of the Senate version of the bill, Senate Judiciary Committee chairman Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.), said he would propose that the domain name blocking provision of the bill be studied before implementation. Nevertheless, Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Oregon) indicated that even if the provision were removed, he still would be opposed to the legislation because of other aspects of the bill. And as opponents flood congressional offices with e-mails and phone calls, there are signs that some previous supporters are reconsidering. Sen. Ben Cardin (D-Md.), a co-sponsor of the legislation, said on Friday that he would not vote for final passage of the legislation "as currently written." House Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) said that he would call for a cloture vote on Jan. 24, but there has been pressure on him to postpone."(snip)
The pertinent point here is that some of the voices being raised over 'internet censorship' have now alerted US politicians to the fact that the SOPA vote may fail if 'domain blocking' provisions are left in the bill. So the likely result, where foreign webcam hosts are concered, will be that US customers will still be able to access StreaMates and other non-US based webcam host sites. However, they WON'T be able to transfer money to those non-US based webcam hosts since the SOPA law will force US based online credit card processors to prohibit any such transactions. This defuses the potential issue of internet censorship !!! US customers will still have the 'right' to view FREE StreaMates and other non-US based webcam host site content. They simply won't be allowed to spend money to purchase paid content !
-
Re: SOPA's intentions
That is good to know. Ty for the information. Very much.appreciated
Posting Permissions
- You may not post new threads
- You may not post replies
- You may not post attachments
- You may not edit your posts
-
Forum Rules
Bookmarks